Preamble

The House met at half-past Two o'clock

PRAYERS

[Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair]

Oral Answers to Questions — SOUTH AFRICA

Sale of Arms

Mr. Mayhew: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will take action to enforce a complete embargo on the sale of arms from Britain to the Union of South Africa.

The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. R. A. Butler): No, Sir. Our policy in regard to the export of arms to South Africa was explained by Sir Patrick Dean in the United Nations Security Council on 7th August last.

Mr. Mayhew: Is the Foreign Secretary not fully aware of the widespread resentment at the continued sale of arms by this country to the Union of South Africa? Will he, in particular, deny the report in the Observer of 17th October that we are now sending tear gas, spare

parts for Saracen armoured cars, and 15 helicopters to the Union of South Africa?

Mr. Butler: I should need to investigate the question put to me by the bon. Member. I must make it clear that Sir Patrick Deal said that no arms would be exported to South Africa which would enable the policy of apartheid to be enforced. That remains the Government's policy.

Mr. Mayhew: Is it not reasonable to expect the Foreign Secretary to keep a check on reports on this kind, which are backed, I believe, by the World Council of Churches, that armoured car parts, tear gas and heli copers are being sent to the Union. Has he not seen those reports?

Mr. Butler: I certainly could not give an answer without investigation. I will certainly make an investigation and inform the ton. Member.

Mr. Brockway: Is not this distinction between arms to be used for external purposes and arms to be used in South Africa itself quite unreal? For example, are not these helicopters being used to keep watch on the borders for refugees and would they not be used in any internal upsurge within South Africa?

Mr. Butler: There is a distinction between arms which are used definitely and exclusively to enforce the policy of apartheid and arms which are necessary for the sell-defence—under Article 51 of the Charter—of South Africa itself, which involves sea routes. I will investigate the question of helicopters at the


request of the hon. Member for Woolwich, East (Mr. Mayhew), which has been mentioned by the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway).

Extradition Arrangements(High Commission Territories)

Mr. Wall: asked the Secretary of Statefor Foreign Affairs what extradition arrangements have been made with the South African Government with regard to the High Commission Territories.

The Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. Peter Thomas): No newextradition arrangements have yet been made with the South African Government since the lapse of the Fugitive Offenders procedure consequent upon South Africa's departure from the Commonwealth.

Mr. Wall: Would my hon. Friend say whether talks are now going on? If so, would he bear in mind the extreme importance of observing the traditional British policy of affording political refuge for political refugees? It is equally important, however, to ensure that these Territories are not used as a base for subversion against the Republic. Does he agree that their geographical position makes them extremely vulnerable for any action against the Republic?

Mr. Thomas: Discussions were held in April last, and further discussions will be required. I shall be glad to inform my hon. Friend of progress in the matter.

Mr. Mayhew: Can the Minister of State assure the House that these extradition arrangements will not vary from the standard extradition arrangements we have with other countries?

Mr. Thomas: Yes, they will in fact go further. As I said in the debate on the South Africa Bill on 26th February of last year, there is no question of returning persons for offences of a political character, nor for offences which attract the death penalty in South Africa but not in the Territories, nor for offences which are not punishable in the Territory which has been requested to surrender the fugitive.

Mr. Gordon Walker: Can the hon. Gentleman confirm that there is no extradition arrangement whatsoever at the

moment, that the Fugitive Offenders Act has lapsed, that nothing has been put in its place, and that there are no extradition arrangements whatever between us and the Republic of South Africa?

Mr. Thomas: Yes, that is so.

Aircraft Flights (Landing Restrictions)

Mr. Brockway: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what communication has been received from the Government of the Republic of South Africa regarding the restriction of air flights from the High Commission Territories across South African territory.

Mr. P. Thomas: None, Sir.

Mr. Brockway: Are we to understand that South Africa has unilaterally reached a decision on this matter which affects the flight of our planes over the territory of the Republic? Is it not particularly desirable that there should be some protection for the refugees who are seeking to travel from Basutoland to Bechuanaland or from one territory to another?

Mr. Thomas: Yes, Sir. It is quite right that the South African Government have unilaterally reached a decision on this matter. They are acting within their rights under the Chicago Convention in doing so.

Mr. Mayhew: While they have the right in international law, is it not a fact that they have taken the decision without consultation and it affects our sovereign rights within the Protectorates? What protest has the hon. Gentleman made and what consultations has he had to get this stopped?

Mr. Thomas: As I have said, they are within their rights under the Convention in requiring aircraft flying over their territory to land. That is what it amounts to. We are observing how these landing requirements work out in practice. If they appear injurious to the High Commission Territories we shall consider what action we can properly take.

Mr. Biggs-Davison: Will Her Majesty's Government do their best to see that this rather petty business of African


States and Territories restricting each other's flights is brought to an end as not conducive to peaceful conditions in Africa?

Mr. Thomas: Again, these decisions are matters for the African Governments themselves. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is certainly better for all concerned if we have free transit between countries.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUSSIAN-LANGUAGE PERIODICAL

Mr. Mayhew: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what is the estimated readership in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of the Russian-language periodical Anglia; and if he will now arrange for the publication of similar periodicals in other Communist countries.

Mr. P. Thomas: In accordance with our agreement with the Soviet Government 50,000 copies of Anglia are distributed by the Soviet authorities and a further 2,000 by Her Majesty's Embassy. As far as I am aware, the full number of each issue is being put into circulation. I do not know how many people read each copy.
As to the second part of the Question, I agree that it would be useful if we could produce similar magazines for other Communist countries. But, as the hon. Member knows, it is a question of allocating available resources to different types of cultural and information work. Magazines are one of the projects which we are considering.

Mr. Mayhew: Is the Minister aware that the image of Britain in the Soviet Union has improved considerably during recent years and that part of this is due to the excellent magazine, Anglia? Will he look into the possibility of publishing a similar magazine in Poland and Hungary, where it could have a big commercial sale and might do a lot of good to our relations with these countries?

Mr. Thomas: We will certainly look into the possibility, but it is a question of deciding priorities.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNITED NATIONS

Angola and Mozambique

Mr. Biggs-Davison: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why the United Nations refused the Portuguese Government's invitation to send representatives to study economic, social and political conditions in Angola and Mozambiqus.

Mr. P. Thomas: To the best of my knowledge, the Portuguese Government have not issued any recent invitation of this kind to the United Nations.

Mr. Biggs-Davison: Is my hon. Friend aware that I noticed the word "recent"? Is he aware also that the I.L.O. has absolved portugal from the many charges made on the score of forced labour? In he further aware that W.H.O. has commended Portugal for her campaign against leprosy in Guinea? In the interests of peaceful co-existence in Africa, is it not desirable that the different territories of Africa should get to know each other better? Will Her Majesty's Government support in every way possible the initiative taken for discussion between the Portuguese Government and the Governments of African States which were arranged by the Secretary-General?

Mr. Thomas: We certainly support it, and we consider these dialogues between the Portuguese Government and the African States to be extremely useful. As to invitations, it must be a matter for the Portuguese Government whether they wish co issue them.

Development Decade

Mr. W. Hamilton: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why Her Majesty's Government supported a resolution before the United Nations General Assembly in favour of the contracting out by Governments from the world campaign against poverty, hunger, disease and ignorance, and in favour of leaving the campaign to the efforts of voluntary organisations.

Mr. J. Hynd: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs why Her Majesty's Government has proposed a resolution in the United Nations seeking


to reduce governmental responsibility for the United Nations Development Decade.

Mr. P. Thomas: Her Majesty's Government have not proposed or supported any such resolution: nor has such a resolution been tabled at the General Assembly.

Mr. Hamilton: How can the right hon. Gentleman explain the correspondence and comments which have appeared in responsible organs of the Press to this effect? Will he now give a categorical assurance that, however admirable be the efforts of the voluntary organisations, he and the Government will undertake to play a very major part in the British contribution to this great effort?

Mr. P. Williams: On a point of order. Are hon. Members not responsible for the accuracy of their Questions and the information alleged to be contained therein, Mr. Speaker? If in an authoritative Front Bench statement it is shown that there is no accuracy in such a Question, should not the hon. Member responsible for it withdraw the Question?

Mr. Speaker: The second part is hypothetical. As to the first part of the point of order raised, it is true to this extent: that hon. Members take personal responsibility for any statement, fact or alleged fact in their Questions.

Mr. Thomas: I can assure the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. W. Hamilton) that I do not accuse him of bad faith, because there is no doubt that other people have made the same mistake. I am afraid that both he and people who wrote to the newspapers have sadly misinterpreted the resolution which was put before the United Nations, which Her Majesty's Government have supported and which is supported by many other countries, such as Ghana, Liberia, Nepal, Argentina and Chile. In no way does it minimise the need for all Governments to play their full part in the United Nations Development Decade—and Her Majesty's Government intend to do so.

Mr. J. Hynd: Is it not the case that the resolution calls on voluntary organisations to make the greatest possible effort towards the Decade but, while suggesting that Governments should encourage the voluntary organisations, makes no refer-

ence to any direct Government contribution? Why has the proposal that Governments themselves should lay down a target, as suggested in the United Nations Parliamentary Group, been dropped, and what has happened to the 1 percent, which we undertook to contribute at the beginning of the Decade?

Mr. Thomas: The hon. Member is mistaken and I suggest that he looks at the resolution. He says that it makes no reference to Government contributions, but he will see that it recalls previous resolutions which did. I also remind the hon. Gentleman of what my right hon. Friend said in answer to a Question on 20th November. He said:
It is in no way intended to detract from the primary responsibility of Governments, but is intended to stimulate popular enthusiasm here and elsewhere for the Decade in the same way that it was aroused for the Freedom From Hunger Campaign and the World Refugee Years."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 20th November, 1963; Vol. 684. c. 106.]

Mr. P. Noel-Baker: Since this resolution, which I hold in my hand, has been interpreted very widely as throwing responsibility on to the non-governmental organizations and since it makes no reference, except in recalling a resolution of 1961, to any further effort by Governments themselves, will Her Majesty's Government now put forward a resolution in the General Assembly calling for large-scale Government contributions?

Mr. Thomas: The British Government make a very large contribution, and we will certainly continue to do all we can. If this has been misinterpreted, it is not the fault of Her Majesty's Government, nor the fault of all the other countries, including African and Asian countries, which supported the resolution.

Southern Rhodesia

Mr. Brockway: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs how the British delegation voted in the General Assembly of the United Nations on the resolution calling upon the United Kingdom Government not to accede to the request of the minority Government of Southern Rhodesia for independence until majority rule based on adult suffrage is established and inviting it to hold without delay a constitutional conference in which all political parties


would take part; which nations voted for the resolution; which voted against", and which abstained.

Mr. R. A. Butler: The United Kingdom did not participate in the vote on the resolution in question. The resolution was adopted by 73 votes to 2, with 19 abstentions. As the list of nations voting is a long one, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. Brockway: While thanking the Foreign Secretary for that reply, may I ask whether he will consider very carefully, now that he has become Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, the new attitude towards these questions in the United Nations? Is it not the case that, while ten or twelve years ago one could say that one would not participate in a vote because that would be to intervene in another territory, the climate of the world today is such that we must declare an opinion in the United Nations on these great issues?

Mr. Butler: United Kingdom action is based on the belief that the United Nations is not competent to pass resolutions about the internal affairs of Southern Rhodesia.

Mr. Wall: Would not my right hon. Friend agree that such a resolution would destroy the agreement reached at the Victoria Falls Conference; and that, constitutionally, this Government can in no way interfere with the present Constitution of Southern Rhodesia?

Mr. Butler: Yes, Sir. That represents the position.

Following is the list:

The following 73 nations voted for the resolution:


Hungary.
Morocco.


India.
Nepal.


Indonesia.
Niger.


Iran.
Nigeria.


Iraq.
Pakistan.


Israel
Panama.


Jamaica.
Ghana.


Jordan.
Peru.


Kuwait.
Philippines.


Laos.
Poland.


Lebanon.
Romania.


Liberia.
Rwanda.


Libya.
Saudi Arabia.


Madagascar.
Somalia.


Malaysia.
Sudan.


Mali.
Syria.


Mexico.
Tanganyika.


Mongolia.
Thailand.

The following two nations voted against the resolution:


Portugal.
South Africa.

The following 19 nations abstained from voting on the resolution:


Iceland.
U.S.A.


Italy.
Australia.


Japan.
Austria.


Luxembourg.
Belgium.


Netherlands.
Canada.


New Zealand.
Denmark.


Norway.
Finland.


Spain.
France.


Sweden.
Greece.


Turkey.

CONGO

Mr. P. Williams: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the situation in the Congo.

Mr. R. A. Butler: Some progress has been made towards economic stability, by means which include the recent measures of monetary reform. Some progress has also been made towards improving the training and organisation of the forces responsible for internal security. Meanwhile, it has been agreed at the request of the Congolese Government that the United Nations will retain a reduced force in the Congo until the middle of 1964.

Mr. Williams: Would my right hon. Friend like to comment on the possible call on United Nations finances for this operation in due course?

Mr. Butler: Yes, Sir; if I have notice, 1 could answer a Question on that subject.

Mr. P. Noel-Baker: Will the Foreign Secretary note my view that all parts


of the House will receive with gratification the news that the United Nations troops are to remain a further six months? Will the right hon. Gentleman make inquiries into the well-substantiated statements that there are more than 200 mercenaries in Angola waiting to come back into Katanga to make trouble?

Mr. Butler: I note the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's statement. I will investigate the second part.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDONESIA

Representations

Mr. P. Williams: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the representations that have been made to Indonesia.

Mr. R. A. Butler: During 1963 representations have been made to the Indonesian Government concerning their attitude to Brunei and Malaysia, their incursions into former British territory, their attacks on British missions and their discrimination against British commercial firms, as well as on other questions of lesser importance. If my hon. Friend would be good enough to let me know which aspect of Anglo-Indonesian relations interests him, I shall be glad to send him particulars of the representations made in that connection.

Mr. Williams: Would my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that Her Majesty's Government will continue to support, by whatever military means may be necessary, the freedom and independence of Malaysia, which is being attacked by aggression from out with, namely, from Indonesia? Is he aware that but for the distressing and disturbing occurrences of the last few days in the United States of America some of us might want to put fairly critical questions on the representations being made by Her Majesty's Government to the Government of the United States about their relations with Indonesia?

Mr. Butler: It is our determination to defend Malaysia against attacks from whatever quarter. I said that in my speech in the debate on the Gracious Speech, and I repeat it now. In regard

to our relations with the United States, there are a number of Questions on the Order Paper today and I think it will be found that we have made the right representations at the right time.

Malaysian Border Incidents

Mr. A. Henderson: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the present situation on the border of Indonesia and Malaysia.

Mr. R. A. Butler: During the past month there have been at least twelve armed incursions into Malaysian Borneo from bases on Indonesian territory. These activities are not seriously affecting normal life in Malaysian Borneo but are a considerable irritation. Our troops are involved in support of the Security Forces, at the request of the Malaysian Government, under the terms of the Anglo-Malaysian Defence Agreement.
There have also, during the past few weeks, been several infringements of Malaysian air space on the part of Indonesian military aircraft, but these have not led to any incidents.

Mr. Henderson: Has any consideration been given to the desirability of stationing United Nations observers in this area?

Mr. Butler: This has been considered, but it is primarily a matter for decision by the Malaysian Government.

Mr. P. Williams: Is my right hon. Friend aware that one of our military shortages in the Far East is in helicopters; and that if we are to meet our obligations and duty in this matter the Far East Fleet needs to be reinforced, as does the Army, in this sense?

Mr. Butler: I will make known what my hon. Friend says.

British Civilians and Companies

Mr. Farr: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what compensation has been paid by the Government of Indonesia to British civilians and companies affected by the recent events there.

Mr. R. A. Butler: No compensation has yet been paid by the Government


of Indonesia for losses, damage or injury suffered by British nationals as a result of the disorders in Indonesia in September. As I told hon. Members in the debate on the Address, the Indonesian Government have offered compensation for the damage done to some of the property owned by the British Government. In order to secure a comprehensive agreement, we are continuing negotiations to cover ail British property damaged.

Mr. Farr: Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him to bear in mind that the Indonesian Government appeared at that time passively to condone the actions of the mob and must be held fully responsible for damage caused to British property and interests?

Mr. Butler: Yes, Sir. It is in the realisation of that fact that we are conducting our negotiations with the Indonesian Government.

Oral Answers to Questions — BERLIN

Mr. Zilliacus: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the Government's policy regarding the preservation of Western rights in Berlin remains as stated by the British representative at the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Council on 13th December, 1961.

Mr. R. A. Butler: The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Council discussions on 13th December, 1961, were, and remain, confidential. Her Majesty's Government continue to support the policy set forth in the communique issued at the end of the meeting on 15th December, 1961.

Mr. Zilliacus: Has not the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the report in The Times on the days following this date that the then Foreign Secretary, the present Prime Minister, told the N.A.T.O. Council that the British people would be prepared to be blown into atomic dust in preservation of Western rights in Berlin? As public opinion polls have shown that only 8 per cent, of the population are prepared to take any risk of war, especially about Berlin, quite apart from being blown to atomic dust, will the Foreign

Secretary give an assurance that any practical differences between ourselves and the Soviet Union over Berlin will be settled by peaceful means and that Her Majesty's Government will not risk a nuclear war for the sake of such differences?

Mr. Butler: Iregard the words as a distortion of the views of my right hon. Friend who was Foreign Secretary at the time. The policy of Her Majesty's Government remains as stated in the N.A.T.O. communiqué. In regard to Berlin, we have already given to the Soviet Union the harmonised views of the allies on procedures on the Autobahn, and I see no reason whatever why these should not be settled by discussion or negotiation.

Mr. A. Henderson: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will state in detail the established procedures governing the rights of access to West Berlin.

Mr. R. A. Butler: No, Sir. After careful consideration I have concluded that it is better to keep these details confidential.

Mr. Henderson: As the allied convoys that are hold up from time to time on the Berlin Autobahn are usually small convoys currying less than forty men, would it not be possible for the Western Governments to invite the Soviet Government to agree that small convoys should be checked without calling upon the men being carried to alight from their vehicles?

Mr. Butler: We have already harmonised our procedures and put them to the Soviet Government. This matter therefore stands on that basis, and I do not think that I can carry it any further without the consent of our American and French allies.

Mr. Henderson: But will not the Foreign Secretary make such a proposal to the other Governments concerned? Something ought to be done to avoid these incidents?

Mr. Butler: We have already harmonised our procedures, and these are well understood by the Soviet Government. I do not think that our allies would wish to carry this matter further at the present stage.

Mr. Gordon Walker: But if the procedures have been conveyed to the Russian Government, what purpose is there in keeping them secret?

Mr. Butler: We have not the consent of our American and French allies to make them public.

Oral Answers to Questions — VIETNAM

Mr. Rankin: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will now publish the evidence in his possession of military assistance in forms inconsistent with the provisions of the Geneva Agreement, provided to the governing authorities in North and South Vietnam by the Soviet Government, the Chinese People's Republic, France, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, and Malaya, respectively.

Mr. P. Thomas: It is for the International Control Commission to report whether any foreign military assistance, inconsistent with the Geneva Agreements, has been provided in Vietnam. The reports of this body have been published and made available to the House. The last report was that of June, 1962, which was reproduced in Command Paper 1755 of 1962.

Mr. Rankin: First, is the hon. Gentleman telling us that the Geneva Agreements as they apply to South-East Asia have not been broken by at least some of the countries which are named in this Question, despite any reports to which the hon. Gentleman refers? Secondly, does he ask people to believe that war could have been conducted for the time it has been waged in that part of Asia if supplies of arms from outside the Territory mentioned were not coming from one or other of the Powers I have named?

Mr. Thomas: No, Sir, I am not telling the House that the Geneva Agreements have not been broken. In fact, the last report, which I referred to in my Answer, says quite specifically that they have been broken in many regards by the North Vietnamese Government.

Mr. Harold Davies: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that he has not fully and truthfully answered the Question? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I have read every one of the International Control Commission's

Reports and talked to members of the International Control Commission in Vietnam. The Question asks the hon. Gentleman to collate the evidence of the supply of military material by any party. The hon. Gentleman knows full well that materials—

Hon. Members: Question.

Mr. Harold Davies: Will he now publish it and lay it on the Table of the House or in the Library?

Mr. Thomas: The reports have been published and are available to the House. I noticed that the question in fact omitted to mention the participation of North Vietnam.

Mr. Warbey: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the change of regime in South Vietnam, it is still his intention to prolong the stay of the British Advisory Mission in that area.

Mr. P. Thomas: Yes, Sir.

Mr. Warbey: Is the hon. Gentleman not a little ashamed that nearly £150,000 of British taxpayers' money has been devoted to aiding and abetting what is now revealed as the most cruel tyranny of modern times? Is it really the Government's intention to go on aiding and abetting a regime which, according to The Times, is mainly concerned with pursuing with full ferocity the war against the Vietnamese peasants?

Mr. Thomas: Her Majesty's Government are not concerned with aiding and abetting any particular Government in Vietnam but with the survival of the freedom of the Vietnamese people.

Mr. A. Royle: Is my hon. Friend aware that on this side of the House we welcome the retention of the Thompson Mission in South Vietnam, which has done a fine job in that area in the last two years?

Mr. P. Noel-Baker: Does the Minister recall that the Governments stated in Geneva in 1954 that the essential purpose of the Agreement relating to Vietnam was to settle military questions with a view to ending hostilities and making a political settlement? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to consider whether we can now do something to


try to secure an end to this horrible conflict which has lasted for so many years?

Mr. Thomas: I suggest, with respect, that that is rather a different question, but I remind the right hon. Gentleman that the Advisory Mission is a civilian mission in South Vietnam.

Oral Answers to Questions — SPAIN

Miss Joan Bryden

Mr. A. Brown: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if his attention has been drawn to the case of Miss Joan Bryden, a British subject, who has been held without trial since 1st December, 1962, in Barcelona's Modela Prison as an accessory to a murder, although the police admit that she knew nothing about the killing; and if he will make representations about the case.

Mr. P. Thomas: Miss Joan Bryden is accused of being an accessory after the fact to the murder of a Spanish citizen. We are informed that she will have to stand trial with five other accused persons. I am not aware that the Spanish police have admitted that Miss Bryden was ignorant of the alleged murder. She is, in fact, accused of acting with knowledge of the crime. Representations have been made to the Spanish authorities with a view to expediting the trial.

Senor Fraga Iribarne

Mr. R. Edwards: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) what is the purpose of the official visit of Senor Fraga Iribarne, the Spanish Minister of Information;
(2) whether he will cancel the official visit to this country of the Spanish Minister of Information, arranged for 24th to 28th November.

Mr. Jeger: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will make a statement on the forthcoming official visit of the Spanish Minister of Information and Tourism.

Mr. Millan: asked the Secretary of State forForeign Affairs if he will make a statement on the visit to the United Kingdom of the Spanish Minister of Information, Sr Fraga Iribarne.

Mr. Rankin: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will cancel the proposed official visit to this country of the Spanish Minister of Information and Tourism.

Mr. R. A. Butler: Senor Fraga Iribarne was originally invited by the Royal Institute of International Affairs to lecture on 26th November. When Her Majesty's Government learned that he was coming to this country, they decided to invite him to be their official guest during his visit. An invitation was accordingly conveyed and accepted on 12th September. During his visit Senor Fraga hopes to make himself familiar with various aspects of British information activities. I see no reason to cancel the visit, which has already begun.

Mr. Edwards: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the visit of this Minister is very greatly resented [HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—by many hon. Members on this side of the House and is also resented—[Interruption.]—this is the Franco lobby—by the British trade union movement, because this particular Minister, although he had the power, refused to investigate allegations of torture and indignities committed against Spanish miners and their wives, which included the public beating and shaving of heads of at least six miners'wives in Asturias? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these allegations have been confirmed by an hon. Member of this House, and does he not agree that this continued moral and economic support of the Franco regime is completely out of tune with our belief in human freedom?

Mr. Butler: No, Sir. This invitation is part of the usual exchange of Ministerial visits with countries with which we enjoy normal diplomatic relations, with the object of improving mutual understanding. I go further than that and say that, in so far as we might wish to influence other countries, we have a better chance of doing so by promoting contacts with them rather than by imposing a boycott.

Mr. Jeger: Will the Foreign Secretary bear in mind, when discussing with our distinguished visitor better relations between Britain and Spain, that those relations could be improved if Spain were to liberalise her regime? Will the right hon.


Gentleman also bear in mind that he carries great influence in Spain, since he was so helpful to the Franco regime 25 years ago?

Mr. Butler: All I can say is that, in my conversations with Senor Fraga Iribarne, I am sure that we can exchange views on all these matters.

Mr. Millan: Will not the Foreign Secretary convey to Senor Fraga Iribarne the repugnance felt by most people in this country—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—at these well-authenticated cases of ill-treatment ofpolitical prisoners? Would not the biggest step the Franco Government could take towards improving relations between Spain and this country be to bring their practical policies more into line with their claims to be a liberalising regime?

Mr. Butler: I do not doubt that, on visiting England, the Spanish Minister will register the views that have been expressed, but I must safeguard Her Majesty's Government's position by saying that we cannot interfere with the internal affairs of Spain.

Mr. Rankin: Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there was a time in this country's history when we did show a bit of discrimination in the choice of our visitors? Do I take it that now that the Foreign Minister has this gentleman here he is telling us in the replies he has already given that he will have a quiet talk with the Spanish Minister and tell him that many of the practices of the Spanish Government offend Members of Parliament on this side? Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Spanish Minister to try to amend, or help to amend, the ways of his Government when he goes back to Spain.

Mr. Butler: I cannot forestall or forecast what my conversations with Senor Fraga Iribarne will be, but, as I have said, he certainly will register the opinions expressed.

Sir P. Agnew: Is my right hon. Friend aware that Senor Fraga Iribarne is generally, and rightly, recognised as representative of the liberal-minded thought that is now actuating many of the policies of the Spanish Government, and is, therefore, a most welcome visitor to this country?

Mr. Butler: I should like to make it clear to the House that the Press cen-

sorship in Spain has been considerably relaxed since Senor Fraga Iribarne's appointment as Minister of Information.

Mr. J. Griffiths: In his conversations will the Foreign Secretary convey to his visitor that there is deep concern amongst the members of my union—the National Union of Mineworkers—at the reports that have come from Spain of physical injury done to men whose only crime was that they struck and ceased work against intolerable conditions?

Mr. Butler: Subject to my not intervening in the internal affairs of Spain, I think that it would be perfectly possible to see that when he talks to me Senor Fraga Iribarne understands the feelings that have been expressed.

Mr. Biggs-Davison: While one knows that not everything is perfect in Spain and in the Asturias mines, or anywhere else, is my right hon. Friend aware that we did not hear very much about the liberalisation of the regime when all parties in this country quite rightly welcomed Mr. Khrushchev and Marshal Tito to the United Kingdom?

Mr. Butler: Sir, we must keep a sense of proportion.

Oral Answers to Questions — SOUTH-EAST ASIA

Mr. Warbey: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he will publish the heads of the hitherto unpublished agreement between the British and American Governments for mutual military and political support in South-East Asia, including Vietnam and Malaysia.

Mr. P. Thomas: There is no such agreement.

Mr. Warbey: In that case, how does the hon. Gentleman explain the switch in British policy, which was made about three years ago, from carrying out a mediating role between China and America in South-East Asia to one of full support for American policy? May I make this appeal to the Foreign Secretary through the hon. Gentleman, namely, that, in the new mood in the world today, will he take the initiative for a return to the Geneva policy of 1954 and try to bring about a peaceful settlement in that troubled area?

Mr. Thomas: There has been no change in the policy of Her Majesty's Government in this area over that period.

Oral Answers to Questions — NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANISATION

Mr. Zilliacus: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he wilt inform Britain's North Atlantic Treaty Organisation Allies that until there is agreement on a basis of negotiation with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for a European settlement Her Majesty's Government will not accept further military or financial commitments to the Organisation, and that it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government that an ally pursuing a policy considered provocative by Her Majesty's Government forfeits the right to British support under the collective defence against unprovoked aggression obligations of the Organisation.

Mr. P. Thomas: No, Sir.

Mr. Zilliacus: Will the hon. Gentleman represent to his right hon. Friend that, by refusing any such way of making defence the servant of foreign policy, he is making foreign policy the servant of defence, in the sense that the Government renounce any initiative in making peace for the sake of preserving the alliance, and are even prepared to be committed to war by allies pursuing policies which we regard as provocative and dangerous? If that really is the Government's policy, are they prepared to ask for a mandate at the next election to blow the people of this country to atomic dust for this kind of policy?

Mr. Thomas: With respect, that is a complete distortion of Her Majesty's Government's policy. Our obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty are clearly stated in Article 5 of the Treaty, and I see no reason whatsoever to qualify them.

Oral Answers to Questions — NUCLEAR-FREE ZONES

Mr. Swingler: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what conditions Her Majesty's Government requires to be fulfilled to give support to nuclear-free zones in certain areas.

Mr. P. Thomas: Each area has its own particular problems and proposals for nuclear-free zones must be considered on their individual merits. In general, however, Her Majesty's Government consider that a decision to form a nuclear-free zone should be taken voluntarily and freely by the States concerned. All militarily significant States, and if possible all States in the zone proposed, should participate. The creation of such a zone should not disturb the existing military balance, and there should be arrangements for impartial verification adequate to the particular circumstances.

Mr. Swingler: How is it possible to make such arrangements unless some proposals are put forward by leading Powers? Why it is that, whenever proposals are put forward like the Rapacki Plan or by the African States, Her Majesty's Government have always turned them down? How is it possible to get discussions or agreements on this matter unless leading Governments actually tables proposals?

Mr. Thomas: That is not quite true. Proposals were put forward at the United Nations in relation to Latin America. Her Majesty's Government did not turn them down, but supported a resolution calling upon the Latin American States to initiate studies with a view to establishing a nuclear-free zone.

Mr. Swingler: Will the hon. Gentleman support a resolution calling upon the Latin American Powers to study proposals on this lines, for example, of the plan put forward by Mr. Rapacki?

Mr. Thomas: No, Sir. Because such proposals would conflict with the criteria which I have given in my Answer.

Oral Answers to Questions — SHANGHAI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL (EX-EMPLOYEES)

Mr. J. Howard: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he will review die ex gratia payments made to ex-employees of the Shanghai Municipal Council.

Mr. P. Thomas: Such a review has just been completed, as a result of which Her Majesty's Government have reluctantly concluded that these payments should continue at their present level.

Mr. Howard: Has my hon. Friend taken into account the fact that these pensioners, including as they do nurses and police officers, were all employees of British municipal councils in China? Will he also bear in mind that some consideration should be given to them on that account, particularly in relation to the purchasing power of their pensions which were fixed in 1949?

Mr. Thomas: I can assure my hon. Friend that all these matters were taken into account and it was with reluctance that Her Majesty's Government came to the conclusion which I have just mentioned.

Dame Irene Ward: May I ask my hon. Friend why always on these matters of pensions Her Majesty's Government have to do things with reluctance? Could they not for once take a forward action? Is it not tremendously important that people of this kind who serve humanity all over the world should have accurate, proper and decent treatment from this country?

Mr. Thomas: As my hon. Friend knows, responsibility for paying these pensions rests with the Chinese Government. Her Majesty's Government have assisted these pensioners by giving them advances, well knowing that Her Majesty's Government would probably not get them back.

Oral Answers to Questions — YEMEN

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what form of relations Her Majesty's Government is maintaining with the Yemeni Government; whether a British charge d'affaires is resident in territory under Royalist control; what knowledge he has of the present condition and usage of the former British Legation in Taiz; and if the United Nations Yemen Observation Mission has reported on the extent to which Egyptian troops have been withdrawn.

Mr. R. A. Butler: Diplomatic relations with the Yemen Government are maintained through the Yemeni Legation in London; there is no British representative resident in territory under Royalist control.
Our former Legation building in Taiz, which Her Majesty's Government did not own, was taken over by the Yemeni Republican authorities on 6th November after our remaining possessions there had been removed to the safe keeping of the United States Embassy.
The Secretary-General of the United Nations, in two reports dated 4th September and 28th October to the Security Council, has referred to reports he has received from the United Nations Yemen Observation Mission on United Arab Republic troop withdrawals. Both reports are in the Library of the House.

Mr. Sorensen: Can the right hon. Gentleman give any indication of the number of Egyptian troops who have been withdrawn and the number that remain? Can he give the proportions if he cannot give the actual number? Does his Answer mean that Her Majesty's Government recognise the Royalist regime? What efforts have been made to discover to what extent the Royalists control the Yemen as distinct from the Republicans?

Mr. Butler: In the six weeks' period from the beginning of September, the Observers certified withdrawals of 4,000 U.A.R. troops and replacements of 1,300. I would say from recent reports that the total left may be as high as 28,000. I have no observations to make on the hon. Gentleman's further point.

Sir J. Eden: Why have the Government no representation with the Royalists? What ground have we for withdrawing our support from them? Is it not in British interests that the Egyptians should be withdrawn from the Yemen altogether?

Mr. Butler: We have contact with the Royalists through the Yemeni Legation in London, and for physical reasons that is regarded as the best practice.

Mr. Sorensen: Are we now in touch with the legation in London and can the right hon. Gentleman say whether it retains an ambassador or a charge d'affaires?

Mr. Butler: I should have to investigate that.

Oral Answers to Questions — SARAWAK AND INDONESIA (SUPPLY OF ARMS)

Mr. Fair: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if he is aware that guerilla operations against British troops in Sarawak are supported by Hercules aircraft from Indonesia and that these aircraft are only able to be maintained by the continuous supply of spares from the United States of America; and if he will make representations to the United States Government that the supply of these spares should be stopped.

Mr. Healey: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what representations he has made to the United States administration concerning the supply of military equipment to Indonesia, which is at present engaged in hostilities against British forces in Malaysia.

Mr. R. A. Butler: As a result of representations already made to the United States Government, we have ascertained that the spares for 10 Hercules aircraft are not part of the United States Government aid to Indonesia, but are being supplied by a commercial firm under long-standing contract. An export licence applied for by the firm in connection with this contract was approved in September.
No application has been made since then, and we are asking the United States Government not to grant one. The United States Administration have assured us that no military assistance is being given to Indonesia.

Mr. Farr: While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I press upon him to make vigorous representations on our behalf in this connection? Moreover, will he remind the American Government that these aircraft were supplied to the Indonesians on condition that they were used for non-aggressive military purposes?

Mr. Butler: Yes, Sir. I answer affirmatively to both parts of my hon. Friend's supplementary question.

Mr. Healey: While welcoming very much the assurances given by the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask whether he would not agree that our hand would

be stronger if he could assure the American Government that we have taken steps to see that no spares are provided to service the British equipment which has been given to the Indonesian forces? Can he give any information about the supply of British technicians to install and maintain the Decca early warning system in Indonesia?

Mr. Butler: I should want notice on the last point. I should say, on the first point, that the export of arms and military equipment to any destination is controlled by licensing. This has always been particularly stringent in the case of Indonesia. No licences at all have been granted since mid-September.

Oral Answers to Questions — INDONESIA AND THE PHILIPPINES

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what forms of aid have been extended by Her Majesty's Government to the Republics of Indonesia and the Philippines; what is the financial value of such aid; whether this aid has included any direct or indirect assistance for military purposes; and if he will propose to the Government of the United States of America that any future form of aid to either Government is given mutually by Her Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States of America.

Mr. R. A. Butler: The only significant aid extended by Her Majesty's Government to either country in recent years has been technical assistance under the Colombo Plan. The value of this in the last financial year was £67,935 in the case of the Philippines, and £63,657 in the case of Indonesia. The only form of military assistance received by either country has been the provision of a small number of places on training courses for members of their armed forces, generally at their expense. This is a facility offered to most countries outside the Communist bloc, but no places have been offered to Indonesia since early this year.
We have discussions with the United States Government about the aid which both of us give to developing countries, but I do not believe that the specific


proposal made by the hon. Gentleman would be acceptable to the United States Government.

Mr. Sorensen: While in no sense regretting the economic and other forms of aid to the Philippines, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman does not think that it would be advisable, in a friendly way, to contact the United States Government to see whether they can collaborate with this country in any form of aid to the Phillippines and Indonesia with a special view to preventing any kind of military assistance being given?

Mr. Butler: I ascertained before answering the Question that the position as regards Indonesia is as follows. American military aid has been stopped. Long-term development aid is in suspense. Bilateral economic aid approved by Congress is continuing, and we are in touch with the Americans about the extent of this.

Mr. P. Williams: Can my right hon. Friend give an undertaking that any aid which may have been under consideration for Indonesia and which has subsequently been stopped will be switched to Malaysia?

Mr. Butler: I wish that that could be so.

Oral Answers to Questions — PENSIONS AND NATIONAL INSURANCE

New Cards

Sir B. Janner: asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance why new cards issued to people after the rise in contributions still give the amounts to be paid under the old rate; and if he will arrange for local offices issuing new cards to amend the rates on them before doing so.

The Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (Mr. Richard Wood): It would be uneconomic to reprint cards already printed before Parliament approved the new rates. Wherever a card is issued showing the old rates, a leaflet should accompany it showing the new ones.
If the hon. Member will tell me of any case where this has not happened, I will examine it.

Sir B. Janner: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the placing of a small

sticker on these cards would be sufficient to indicate the change? Is he aware that the present situation is causing a considerable amount of difficulty, particularly among cashiers in offices already overburdened with the difficulties created by P.A.Y.E.? Will he see that something is done to prevent this confusion, which afterwards leads to numerous inquiries and to very little result?

Mr. Wood: My information is that the issue of the leaflet has removed all doubt and, in fact, has been just as efficient in removing doubt as a stick-on stamp.

Mr. Mitchison: Would the right hon. Gentleman, in this instance only, consider the intelligent use of a rubber stamp?

Industrial Injuries, North Staffordshire

Mrs. Slater: asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance (1) in how many appeals made by him against the decisions of medical boards on industrial injuries in North Staffordshire he was successful; and whether he will give the figures for all cases when the appeal came from the injured worker in 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962 and 1963;
(2) how many appeals were made by him against the decisions of medical boards on industrial injuries benefit in North Staffordshire for the years 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, and to the end of September, 1963.

Mr. Wood: I assume that the hon. Lady has in mind my power, which is exercised in the interests both of claimants and of other contributors, to refer decisions of medical boards to the medical appeal tribunal.
Records are not kept in a form which enables this information to be given for particular counties or parts of counties, but I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT some figures relating to the Midland Region as a whole.

Mrs. Slater: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is regrettable that this information is not available in North Staffordshire, in view of the prevalence there of pneumoconiosis? Is he further


aware that there is, particularly among the trade unions, a very strong feeling that the number of these cases, in respect of which the Minister uses his powers, is increasing to the detriment of the injured worker?

Mr. Wood: The only reason for my referring these decisions is that there

DECISIONS OF MEDICAL APPEAL TRIBUNAL:MIDLAND REGION


(1) Disablement benefit—disablement question


Appeals by claimants
References by direction of the Minister


Year
Total
Favourable to claimant
Un-favourable or no change
Total
Favourable to claimant
Un-favourable to claimant
No change


1959
…
1,617
669
948
612
218
267
127





(41·4%)
(58·6%)

(35 6%)
(43·6%)
(20·8%)


1960
…
1,605
683
922
578
174
281
123





(42·6%)
(57·4%)

(30·1%)
(48·6%)
(21·3%)


1961
…
1,332
565
767
421
127
217
77





(42·4%)
(57·6%)

(30·2%)
(51·5%)
(18·3%)


1962
…
1,274
534
740
637
212
317
108





(41·9%)
(58·1%)

(33·3%)
(49·8%)
(16·9%)


1963 (to September)
1,035
481
554
700
915
287
98





(46·5%)
(53·5%)

(45·0%)
(41 ·0%)
(14·0%)

(2) Injury benefit and disablement benefit—diagnosis and recrudescence questions


Appeals by claimants
References by direction of the Minister


Year
Total
Medical Board decisions upheld
Medical Board decisions reversed
Total
Medical Hoard decisions upheld
Medical Board decisions reversed


1959
…
…
…
26
21
5
2
2
—







(81%)
(19%)

(100%)



1960
…
…
…
47
30
17
8
3
5







(64%)
(36%)

(38%)
(62%)


1961
…
…
…
46
30
16
13
7
6







(65%)
(35%)

(54%)
(46%)


1962
…
…
…
40
23
17
19
7
12







(57%)
(43%)

(37%)
(63%)


1963
…
…
…
46
28
18
11
6
5


(to September)

(61%)
(39%)

(55%)
(45%)

Pensioners (Payments)

Mr. John Hall: asked the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance if, in view of the high cost of fares on country bus services, he will find some way of remitting pension payments to pensioners living in rural areas who have to travel some distance to a post office.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Pensions and National Insurance (Mrs. Margaret Thatcher): Arrangements already exist for a pen-

is any doubt about the correctness of the medical board's decision. I think that when the hon. Lady sees the figures she will see that a very high proportion of these references had results favourable to the claimant.

Following is the information:

sioner, in appropriate cases, to appoint a friend or relative to cash his pension orders for him, and these arrangements have, over the years, proved satisfactory for pensioners.

Mr. Hall: May I first, ask my hon. Friend whether she is aware that hon. Members on both sides of the House are delighted to see my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley (Mr. H. Macmillan) back again in the House?

Hon. Members: Hear, hear.

Mr. Hall: May I ask my hon. Friend whether she is aware that many pensioners living in remote rural areas have to travel considerable distances to draw their pensions and that this takes too high a proportion of their pension? Could she not, through her right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General, ask that facilities may be made available so that on a given day and hour post offices shall be open in outlying hamlets for the payment of pensions?

Mrs. Thatcher: I will certainly make representations to the Postmaster-General, but I think that the supplementary question is more one for him than for me.

Mr. J. Griffiths: Will the hon. Lady not now consider whether post offices in some of these rural villages should be authorised to pay pensions?

Mrs. Thatcher: I am not responsible for post offices.

Mr. Cole: Is my hon. Friend aware that not only is there a question of financial hardship involved, but also a question of the physical difficulty of travelling long distances, especially in rural areas where many of these retirement pensioners are situated?

Mrs. Thatcher: There are many more post offices than there are pensions offices. We usually find in cases such as these that someone has to go and get the food and weekly requirements of these pensioners, and when doing so such people can also make arrangements to cash the pension forms.

Miss Herbison: Is the hon. Lady not aware that where an old person is in receipt not only of the basic pension, but also of a supplementary pension, very often such a person does not want anyone else to know about the supplementary pension? Therefore, the hon. Lady's suggestion would rule out anyone else collecting the pension for the pensioner?

Mrs. Thatcher: I have no information about such cases as the hon. Lady has mentioned.

Oral Answers to Questions — MINISTRY OF HEALTH

Drugs

Mr. Pavitt: asked the Minister of Health if a consultant in part-time hospital employ is able to prescribe drugs

to his privately fee-paying patients at the expense of the National Health Service; what check is made on drugs prescribed to hospital patients; and if he will make a statement.

The Minister of Health (Mr. Anthony Barber): No, Sir. Hospital authorities are responsible for the administration of the rules governing the prescribing of drugs for hospital patients and have standing committees for this purpose.

Mr. Pavitt: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many consultants sincerely believe that private patients should be permitted to have their drugs free? In those circumstances, is it not the responsibility of the Ministry to make sure that they are not subjected to temptation in this respect? May I, at the same time, welcome the right hon. Gentleman to the Dispatch Box for the first time in his new capacity and also ask whether he would reaffirm the attitude of his two predecessors, and continue to oppose the issue of free drugs to private patients?

Mr. Barber: The position is as I stated it originally. A private patient pays for the cost of the drugs as part of the general hospital charge for accommodation and services. In the case of the private out-patient, a private prescription should be issued by his doctor.

Mr. K. Robinson: May I add my congratulations to the right hon. Gentleman on his promotion and assure him of our good wishes during what will inevitably be a very short tenure of office? Would the right hon. Gentleman be a little more explicit in the assurance for which my hon. Friend asked?

Mr. Barber: No, Sir. I do not think that I can add to what my predecessor has said on a number of occasions. The hon. Gentleman, to whom I am grateful for his good wishes, knows quite well that Section 5 of the Act lays down that a private patient shall undertake to pay charges designed to cover the whole cost of accommodation and services provided for him.

Dame Patricia Hornsby-Smith: Would my hon. Friend not agree that the implication in this Question is a great slander on the integrity of consultants,


in that it is suggested that they are affording to their private patients facilities to which they are not entitled?

Mr. Barber: Of course, if any hon. Member knows of any case in which it is thought the present machinery is being abused I will be only too happy to look into it.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE

The Lord Privy Seal (Mr. Selwyn Lloyd): In view of the proceedings which are to follow, and which affect the business announced for today, may I inform the House of the rearrangement of business for this week:

TUESDAY, 26TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Police Bill.

Remaining stages of the Kenya Independence, the Zanzibar, and the Bahama Islands (Constitution) Bills.

Motion on the Summer Time Order.

WEDNESDAY, 27TH NOVEMBER—Committee and remaining stages of the Expiring Laws Continuance Bill.

THURSDAY, 28TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Housing Bill, and Committee stage of the Money Resolution.

Motion on the Judicial Offices (Salaries) Order.

FRIDAY, 29TH NOVEMBER—Second Reading of the Electricity and Gas Bill, and Committee stage of the Money Resolution.

Committee and remaining stages of the Nigeria Republic Bill.

The business for Monday, 2nd December, will be as announced.

BILL PRESENTED

PUBLIC WORKS LOANS

Bill to make further provision with respect to loans out of the Local Loans Fund, with respect to temporary borrowing by local authorities in Scotland and with respect to the re-borrowing powers of public authorities; to authorise an increase in the loans which may be made to the Government of Northern Ireland; and for connected purposes, presented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; supported by Mr. Noble, Sir Keith Joseph, and Mr. Boyd-Carpenter; read the First time; to be read a Second time Tomorrow and to be printed. [Bill 18.]

PRESIDENT KENNEDY (TRIBUTES)

3.32 p.m.

The Secretary State for Foreign Affairs (Mr. R. A. Batter): May I have your leave, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House to move a manuscript Motion, a copy of which has been made available to you, Mr. Speaker, and which I will now read to the House in the following terms:
That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying Her Majesty to be graciously pleased to express to the President of the United States of America the shock and deep sorrow with which this House has learned of the death of President Kennedy; and to convey their sense of the loss which this country and the Commonwealth have sustained, and their profound sympathy with Mrs. Kennedy and the family of the late President, and with the Government and people of the United States of America.

Mr. Speaker: As the House is aware, the Motion which the Foreign Secretary asks leave to move is a substantive one. According to the rules which bind me as well as the House, this Motion should have been placed on the Order Paper today to enable it to be moved tomorrow. On this occasion, however, I felt convinced that hon. Members would not wish to proceed with the ordinary businessof the week without passing, at the earliest possible moment, an Address expressing our sympathy and to waive the Rules of the House to enable this to be done.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear.

Mr. Speaker: Being confident that this course is acceptable to the House, I call Mr. Butler.

Mr. Butler: I feel sure that in moving this Motion in the absence of the Prime Minister, I shall have the support of all sections of opinion in the House. After the Motion has been disposed of, we propose to move the Adjournment of the House for today out of respect for the memory of the late President.
I seek to express the sense of sorrow, of shock and of personal grief which is, I know, shared by hon. Members and by the whole nation. The element of personal tragedy in this terrible calamity has moved the hearts of our people. Our first thoughts are with the late President's

courageous widow, her children and the members of his family. We send them our heartfelt sympathy. That a life so vital and so young should be cut short seems harsh beyond the ordinary lot of man. But, at this moment, I invite the House to remember the qualities of one whose example is an inspiration to his successor and to all statesmen.
I refer to his zest for life, his grasp of public affairs, his steadiness of judgment, his constancy of will, his enthusiasm for high ideals, matched by a practical sense of the possible, and his persistent devotion to the duties of his high office. These talents, combined with other qualities of personality and character, gave him what seems, in retrospect, an almost natural supremacy over others. These, Sir, are attributes manifest to us all, even to those of us like myself who did not know him so well as, for example, my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley (Mr. H. Macmillan), who, I am sure we are glad to see, is in the House and was one of his most intimate collaborators.
It is not only horror at the act and the passing of a great President that move us; but also the sense of grave loss which the world has sustained. I deliberately describe John Kennedy as great, for he was, above all, a man whose beliefs and actions had their effect everywhere. This is, of course, true in some measure of all American Presidents in recent times. But under the leadership of President Kennedy, the American nation achieved a position of beneficent authority and influence which has never been surpassed. By his' stature, he gave the United States a position in the councils of the world which was not only far-reaching in power, but dedicated in purpose and altruistic in direction.
We grieve at his death because in all his purpose he strove for a world free of discord and at peace with itself to which men everywhere aspire, and none more fervently than the British people. I stress this above all, because his resolution and judgment, in that supreme crisis just over a year ago kept the peace for the free nations.
President Kennedy's ideals were never better expressed than in his inaugural


address. He spoke thus of the need to create
a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved for ever.
It is, perhaps, prophetic that the next words in that address were these:
All this will not be finished in the first one hundred days. Nor will it be finished in the first one thousand days, nor in the life of this Administration, nor even perhaps in our lifetime on this planet But",
he went on,
let us begin.
In this speech, the late President showed that his power of oratory could compare with the grandeur and immortal simplicity of the Gettysburg address.
But he was cut off in his prime and before he was able to fulfil many of his most cherished dreams in home policy or in the field of foreign affairs. Yet, as the Psalmist said, though young "he fulfilled long years. "His ascent to power in the United States brought promise not only for that great country, but for the world. It seemed as if a new chapter of hope was opening for the American Continent as well as for mankind.
We are inspired, in considering this Motion, by a man of physical and moral courage, a man of exceptional intellectual capacity and drive, a man who brought the excitement of adventure into the life of his own nation and that of the world. He realised the necessity for the two divisions of the world to live together and that a situation dominated by nuclear power demands the vision and patience of real statesmanship. For our part, we must remain a constant friend and partner and do all in our power to maintain the strength of the Alliance. We must press on to achieve the ideals which animated him and thus show that he has not lived in vain.
After this tragic loss, we who are parliamentarians, both here and in other countries of the world, must see that this promise is not lost, that the light is not dimmed and that our sense of purpose is not stunned. We pray for the good health and sense of mission of the new President and pledge ourselves, with him, to the task of making life safer

and better far our generation and those still to come.
I beg to move the Motion.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear.

3.40 p.m.

Mr. Gordon Walker: In the absence in Washington of my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition, it falls to me to second the Motion. We are still so numbed by grief and sorrow at the murder of the man whom we mourn today that we cannot yet even begin to measure or weigh the great consequences that may or will flow from President Kennedy's dreadful death. The void that has been left by his abrupt absence leaves us conscious only that we and the whole world have lost a leader.
I cannot claim to have known the President well. I met and talked once with him for an hour or two. It was on his 46th birthday, his last birthday. I can vividly remember today everything he said. Fie was a man of immense lucidity. He argued cogently and fairly and he was one of the most persuasive men that I have ever encountered. But it was not the things he said that I most remember, but the man himself, his smile, his alert and probing mind, his electric energy, his assurance and, perhaps above all, his gaiety.
What an incomparable man he was! In only two years and ten months of office, he imposed his personality and his policies upon the entire world. John Kennedy set himself to complete the task that had been begun by Abraham Lincoln, of reconciling the races in America. He showed the same clearsighted courage. He showed the same proud disregard for anxious political calculations. Cut off as he has been in mid-career, President Kennedy's assassination may shock into shamed silence the bitter men who sought to frustrate his race policies.
Like President Lincoln, President Kennedy was a man of healing, but President Kennedy's stage was, of course, immeasurably the larger. Lincoln sought to heal a rent and divided nation, but President Kennedy brought a touch of healing to a rent and divided world. He had the gift, given to few, of embodying in himself the anxieties and the aspirations of a whole generation practically the world over and particularly


of the young. He stood for new ideas, for modern art and culture and, above all, for harnessing science to the purposes of society.
Our thoughts and our sympathy, which we cannot find words today to express, go out to his widow, who also gained the love of the world, and to their young children and to the other members of his family. Our heartfelt good wishes go to the new President, on whom has fallen the splendid mantle of John Kennedy. Never before has a man been mourned like this man. While his death has caused anguish in the West, it evoked genuine grief in Russia, too. The reason for this common grief is that President Kennedy became the man whom the world, including, I believe, the Russians, trusted to hold in his hand the thunderbolt of nuclear power.

3.45 p.m.

Mr. Donald Wade: In supporting this Motion, I am very conscious of the fact that it is no easy task for me to add anything new to the tributes which have been paid so movingly and so fittingly by the Foreign Secretary and the right hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Gordon Walker).
This is not an occasion for merely observing the traditional proprieties. If one is to speak at all, one must speak from the heart. But perhaps I might follow the opening words of the Foreign Secretary and put it on record that the depth and sincerity of feeling, which has been so marked during the last three days throughout this country, has been common to people of all parties and of no party.
Like many hon. Members and members of the general public, I was stunned when the news came through on Friday evening. I find it difficult to believe that this outstanding young man should have been struck down in this way. Although he had already reached the pinnacle of power, we assumed that there were still many years of public service ahead of him and much important work still to be done. But it was not to be. His life was snuffed out in a tragedy of wanton violence.
Yet I do not think that John Kennedy would want us to sentimentalise about

him. But we can pay tribute to his intellect, his enthusiasm and his courage, for example, his courage in trying to tackle the evils of race discrimination, and his honesty of purpose. He was certainly much more than a very able politician. I believe that it was John Bright who said thatmen were not great statesmen merely because they happened to fill great offices. That is true. High office brings out qualities in a man, but high office does not make those qualities. During the three years of that extremely onerous office, John Kennedy had shown the qualities of statesmanship. More than that, he had shown himself to be a statesman whom the world could least afford to lose.
There is another reason why everyone so genuinely mourns this loss, another reason for this depth and sincerity of feeling. To many people, John Kennedy represented the hope and promise of youth in a world yearning for peace. So we pray that the shock of his assassination will not lead to a diminishing of that hope and that promise, but rather to a greater determination to achieve the aims that he wished to fulfil.
Meanwhile, there is this deep sense of loss, of personal loss, as if one had lost a member of one's family. As this is a personal occasion, perhaps it would not be out of place if I were to recall that on this same day of the assassination two others lost their lives, a policeman and a security man. I know nothing about them. I do not know whether they have left widows and children. I only know that in their humble roles they were doing their duty and that in doing it they became partners in this tragic waste of life.
I am very glad to have had this opportunity of confirming the sympathy of the British people whom we all here represent, the sympathy for Mrs. Kennedy and her family in their deep sorrow and for the people of the United States in their anguish.

3.50 p.m.

Mr. Harold Macmillan: With the permission of the House I would like to add a few words to the eloquent tributes to the memory of President Kennedy which have been paid on behalf of all the three great parties in our country.
My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, and the right hon. Member for Smethwick (Mr. Gordon Walker) and the hon. Member for Huddersfield, West (Mr. Wade), who followed, have expressed in moving phrases the sympathy which we in the House, aye, and the whole people of Britain, feel with the people of the United States at this tragic moment in their history.
They have also made it abundantly clear that we here, and throughout the Commonwealth, share their sorrow to the full, for we do not merely mourn a grievous loss to the vigour and vitality of American public life; we mourn a world statesman, to whose leadership, in these critical but inspiring days, all the peoples of the world, of whatever race, creed or colour, looked with confidence and hope.
My only purpose in rising is to add a few sentences as a friend and, in a true sense, a colleague. For three years he and I worked in the closest association. Every few months we met—sometimes on British and sometimes on American soil—and in between we interchanged frequent messages and telephone talks. Anyone who knew the President could not fail to realise that behind the captivating charm of manner lay an immense fund of deeply pondered knowledge on a wide range of subjects—political, economic, military. He was one of the best-informed statesmen whom it has ever been my lot to meet, but he was altogether without pedantry or any trace of intellectual arrogance.
The President was very fond of asking questions and trying to find out other people's views. He was chary of giving his own opinion except after much reflection and consideration. Admirably briefed as he always was by his staff, he never stuck slavishly to a brief. Unlike some men with whom discussion is often almost a formality, he was always ready to listen to and to be convinced by argument. In this way he brought to the baffling problems of today a remarkable freshness of mind and flexibility of approach. These were based upon his fundamental moral and mental integrity.
President Kennedy was a man of the highest physical and moral courage, tested and proved in war and in peace.

When things were difficult, almost desperate, he was both resourceful and resolute. Wiien things seemed a bit easier, he displayed a boyish and infectious delight which was irresistible. Although his career has been cut short so tragically, he will stand high even among the great names of great American Presidents.
In this country we shall always remember him its a sincere and loyal friend of Britain. To the whole world without distinction his life and words and actions were a constant inspiration. He did not regard it as a statesman's duty to yield to public opinion, but to strive to lead it. Subjected to great pressures on many conflicting issues, he seemed sometimes to be almost a rather lonely figure, but always true to his own integrity and his own faith. What he said, he meant, and he did his best to accomplish. To him the words "peace and progress" were not just a phrase for a peroration, but a living and burning faith.
So it was, as has been said already, that when that terrible news came on Friday everyone in this country—and, I think, in every country—-felt stunned by the shock of what seemed to us—to each one of us—a personal bereavement, and to the whole of humanity, struggling in this world of darkness, the sudden and cruel extinction of a shining light.
We mourn for him and for his bereaved family, to whom we offer our respectful sympathy, and for all the American people; and we mourn him—and this is perhaps the greatest tribute to Jack Kennedy's life and work—for ourselves, for what we and all the world have lost.

Hon. Members: Hear, hear.

3.56 p.m.

Sir Thomas Moore: As our revered Father of the House, my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill), will not be with us today, it fall:; to my lot to add a few words, however inadequate, on this so sorrowful occasion. Words are hard to find to deal with the tragedy that has befallen us all. It seemed only the other day that we were commemorating Remembrance Day and listening to the words:
They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old",


President Kennedy will no longer grow old, but though his body has gone from us his spirit will surely go marching on—that spirit which inspired him to fight with such vigour, gallantry, courage and determination against fear, suspicion and racial intolerance; to fight with such sure and magnificent confidence that he was right, and to gain so much success—more than most of us believed possible.
But there is one other person who is in all our thoughts today—that sweet, lovely and devoted young wife who was so suddenly bereaved, who has been flung from the summit of happiness, although she has had her sorrows already, to the very abyss of sorrow. Every heart in this country will beat in sympathy with her grief. She will be so sad and so lonesome now. There will be that continuous ache in her heart and emptiness in her home which nothing can replace or fill.
What can we do? It seems to me there is only one thing, which is to pray that God will give rest and peace to him who has gone ahead to the home that they will one day share again, and that that same God will be a constant strength to her during the inevitably lonely future she has here.

3.59 p.m.

Mr. William Yates: By virtue of the fact that there must be many young people in this country who would like a word said today on their behalf, I want to speak because I am a father of an American citizen. This is a cause for much pride to me and to all those who cared for that citizen when he came into the world. I am also one of the hon. Members of this House who sat for a short time in the Senate and passed under the spell of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. In fact, I voted in the Senate on that day.
Now, after the shock of his death, as yesterday I can still hear the voices of

the choir of Lichfield, in that wonderful cathedral—the Ladies of the Vale. I can only repeat now, and recall, the words of the Bishop:
We felt that he was a real friend in all the dangers of the world.
John Kennedy had an enchanting quality of attraction. He was a man of religious conviction, and a statesman who toiled unceasingly for freedom and justice. On behalf of my grieved and sorrowing constituency I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to convey to the American Government and to the American people our tragic sense of anguish and regret at the loss of this beloved American.
Sir, in our Churches the people will pray for his family. In our schools and our technical colleges the young people will always remember this day. As our people work in the fields and the coal mines and on the factory floor they will say to themselves, "He struggled against envy, hate and violence. He knew that which was right. He died: Christ's faithful soldier to the end."
I need say no more.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved, nemine contradicente.

That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty praying Her Majesty to be graciously pleased to express to the President of the United States of America the shock and deep sorrow with which this House has learned of the death of President Kennedy; and to convey their sense of the loss which this country and the Commonwealth have sustained, and their profound sympathy with Mrs. Kennedy and the family of the late President, and with the Government and people of the United States of America.

To be presented by Privy Councillors or Members of Her Majesty's Household.

ADJOURNMENT

Resolved, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Redmayne.]

Adjourned accordingly at two minutes past Four o'clock.